Ah James, what an awesome suggestion... too bad neither of us can ski....

However, the daffodils will bloom soon!!


It is the philosophers though who have always provided the 'meat' which has begun any paradigm shifts...


James, I fear you are missing my intent here, it does directly relate to applied and meta ethics, as you well know. There is no structured definition of maturity, and it has indeed became a focus of secondary education in some schools' and professors' curriculum models...


Do not worry James... it is not a pitfall...


The world changes one person at a time... within...

I have to admit; that I have not read this whole thread. I guess I am just being lazy.

May I?

I am having a hard time coming up with my answers. Ethics have many faces.

Global, communal, governmental,industrial, business, social, etc., etc..

First, ethics refers to well based standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues. Ethics, for example, refers to those standards that impose the reasonable obligations to refrain from rape, stealing, murder, assault, slander, and fraud. Ethical standards also include those that enjoin virtues of honesty, compassion, and loyalty. And, ethical standards include standards relating to rights, such as the right to life, the right to freedom from injury, and the right to privacy. Such standards are adequate standards of ethics because they are supported by consistent and well founded reasons.

Ethics refers to the study and development of one's ethical standards. As was mentioned earlier, feelings, laws, and social norms can deviate from what is ethical. So it is necessary to constantly examine one's standards to ensure that they are reasonable and well-founded. Ethics also means, then, the continuous effort of studying our own moral beliefs and our moral conduct, and striving to ensure that we, and the institutions, lifestyles, issues, and worldly beliefs that we help to shape, live up to standards that are reasonable and solidly-based.

Now, my ethics have been one thing, then reshaped, and molded in another way, from time to time.

We all have them. Some are good and solid. Some are immoral. Prisons are full of ethical people. There own ethics, being what they are.

Organized religions have their own ethics. Religion not really being an ethic? To me anyway.

Ethics is not societal, is it, really? Wouldn't that fall on being "acceptable social behavior"?
Standards of behavior in society can deviate from what is ethical. An entire society can become ethically corrupt. That has happened many times in history.

Kat

Is there an absolute ethical standard? Me thinks not. How can there be, really? Social standards are many in reality.

In some social communities; it is the ethical thing to do when sending an aging elder out to die in the winter freeze, or float them out to the open waters to die. Saving the tribes to live and move on with their families faster.

Our ethics in social behaviors is one that wants to set up our elders to live out their lives in a home. Better than dieing? One would hope.

The ethical terms such as "right" and "wrong" might have meaning, but can their meaning be established? Would that not fall under "majority rule"? Knowing that "majority rule" is not absolute?

Kat

Kat...

Unfortunately, throughout modern history in this country meta-ethics and applied ethics have indeed played a large part in the development of acceptable laws and rules... which neglect empathetic understandings...

Normative ethics need to take center stage...it is much more non judgemental in regards to religious systems, and focuses on the good of the whole of mankind...

Which is part of my determination to better apply the notion of maturity... as it has been held within the scope of comparitive meta and applied ethics for far too long... and should not be a measure of 'good and evil' or 'right and wrong'... merely a measure of internal personal growth towards the practical reasoning skills which relate to being one part of a whole... not just the conformity to 'the norm' of any one particular group... it's common scope it too narrow... much too narrow...




James...one other thing...

You seem to be wanting to take this idea and transform it into some kind of absolute state of being that is beyond any notion of relative behavior. I think from a pure philosopher’s point of view I can see what you are attempting to do.

>>>>>>> My intent does not even begin to separate maturity from relative behaviour... it cannot be done, even if I wanted to.

I want to establish the importance of what is learned by one, and how it may affect one's maturity, while highlighting that maturity is not taught. It's existence lends credence to the notion of the possibility for positive change within each individual and only when it regards empathetic understandings and considerations can it be for the good of all...

Empathy need to be carefully nurtured within our system, so that it be permanently instilled into individuals, and then we would stand a better chance to witness a common denominator in individual maturity which would indeed promote a common good, in spite of thief teaching(s)...

Empathy is indeed instinctual and the grains of which run much deeper than any individual ideaology. If mankind can promote it's growth, only then will we be heading in the right direction for the good of all mankind... Empathy sheds selfishness...

Shoulda read the WHOLE thread. Maturity. I get it. Now to put it into words. Must go and read.

Kat

K...

In my own life; I was taught as a child my parents ethics. Morals, rights and wrongs. Neighborhood do's and don'ts. What worked for my playmates and teachers. The grownups of that time of my life.

It is through my own maturity that I have since learned that My own mind and feelings are what matters. I have grown beyond what I was taught. My own truths have shifted due to the changes of the world around me. The changes within ME. My mind, my heart, my learning.

My integrity is one that is better than I was taught in my own childhood.
Through growing and thinking and looking outside the box, I have loved the human and animal world more than I once did. What was once tolerance is now love and understanding. To tolerate, would mean I think I know more, or better or am better.

My own ethics are not as good as I would wish them to be; but as I grow, they grow. As my own ethics change and become better; so does those closest to me. What I mean by that is: some close to me have morals and "ethics" that can and do sometimes clash with my own. But, due to my changing lifestyle and works, I see change in them. Or is it me I see? Seeing them differently?

Kat

Kat,

It is impossible for me to say which... does it make any difference, as long as inner peace is greater?

Things only look different when one looks looks at things differently...

So would that indeed be ethics in maturity?

Kat

Ethics in maturity can be like the differences in normality. What is normal behavior for one might not be normal behavior for another. The world looks different when one is not stoned all the time. In the group that I go to we have changed the perspective of the word 'normal' with the phrase 'productive member of society' because normal behavior for an addict is to get stoned. Normal can be misleading because it can imply that there is a being out there who is normal and if are not like them then we are not normal. The maturity of it is the realization that no two people are identically alike in every detail. Normal then in ethics is to understand that what is abnormal is to believe that we are the same.

Ethics in maturity can be like the differences in normality. What is normal behavior for one might not be normal behavior for another. The world looks different when one is not stoned all the time. In the group that I go to we have changed the perspective of the word 'normal' with the phrase 'productive member of society' because normal behavior for an addict is to get stoned. Normal can be misleading because it can imply that there is a being out there who is normal and if are not like them then we are not normal. The maturity of it is the realization that no two people are identically alike in every detail. Normal then in ethics is to understand that what is abnormal is to believe that we are the same.

Kat:

Sounds like maturity in ethics to me dear...

We each must indeed walk our own path...




EDIT:

Heya rainbow... different but equal...

Abracadabra: Got some good point there. Sounds like there is some criteria that is requested, however, you cannot lump sum in this way. This is a topic that is highly contingent on individual elements. Ethics can be some broader, but maturity is much more complex.

Passiespel:

Could you express your thoughts on maturity here?


To all:

After re-reading this thread, I have realized one thing... it seems that many would like for me to specifically define 'maturity', and it cannot be done within the common understanding(s)...

I proposed the concept of maturity many times over, one stipulation of which being that it cannot be taught. I have provided what I believe was a sound argument more than once supporting this claim, to no avail. Furthermore, I have still been held within the boundaries of this most inappropriate understanding which equates an outsider's subjective opinion of 'mature' with maturity, thus this conversation has not grown beyond that notion, either, although I have argued soundly against this also.

Without the progression towards an established set of agreements, it is mute...

I think I see where you have been headed, Creative. I’m so sorry it took me so long to understand. It was actually a lack of certain key words in your rhetoric that made me faulter for so long.

Let’s take a fresh look.

Morals: these are the guidelines that we are taught to follow by our family, our educational programs and our peers. There are a great many variables in these teachings because there are many variables that form the foundations for individuals. If morals were the same for everyone all over the world, we could certainly all learn them and live by them, without much discourse as we interact with others from day to day.

Using this example, maturity could well be defined. For maturity would simply mean that one learned to apply all the morals, accepted and conformed to, by society as a whole.

However, because the values of people, everywhere, are accepted through so many variable avenues, no matter what our ‘foundation’ of morals is, we can never, quite, determine or define what ‘maturity’ is.

Obviously the reason is because every day of our lives, we are likely to experience a different ‘moral value’. This obviously forces us to review and assess our ‘founding moral principals’. It requires a logical and open mind to be able to reflect on our own morals and determine if modification is required.

Using this example, maturity can not be defined, because with each experience we are constantly re-evaluating and modifying our morals, or simply refusing to, creating a person unwilling or unable to grow (mature).

So you are absolutely correct. In society today, in the global community, we can not teach maturity from the starting point of millions of variable moral foundations. UNLESS …..

Speaking globally here, if a small society, let’s say the United States, had teams of philosophers and teachers determining a foundation that would uphold the ideas, the values of a ‘normative ethics’, we might, then, have a basis from which to ‘teach’.

This teaching would have to begin from the earliest schooling. In this society, that might be as early as day care. But I believe that if defining principals of a normative ethical code could be developed, that it could be taught.

Having such principals, completely documented and followed within every course of study in every institution of learning, we could have a determined set of values with which to define maturity. In this way, Creative, maturity could be taught.

Here is how. A normative ethical code MUST include certain values. Among those values are these: Sorry, but to save time I looked them up. These are a great deal simpler than the ones in my personal collection of ethics books, so I used them here.



Think about this; now beyond the ‘foundations of morals’, how many kids actually graduate high school and have any clue what the values above mean?

As Abra has pointed, time and again. Teaching these values is not necessarily a text assignment. It DOES require application, in every course of study, in every school activity in which an educator or counselor presides.

This is teaching ‘maturity’, creative. This is teaching what society has determined to be the ‘normative ethical code’. By practical application, by experience, and by reflection of one’s own moral foundations. It is not necessary to deny the ‘moral foundation’ except as it conflicts with the ‘normative ethical code’. And the only reason one would need to ‘deny’ a foundational moral, would have a based in all the values listed above.

If there is the beginning of a ‘normative ethical code’, I believe it exists here in the United States.

The ethics of such code were thrashed out, in very heated and long discussions. But what came out of the hearts and minds of those who took part, is actually a supreme rough draft by which a country would be established. The original constitution of the United States and the early amendments and some of the later ones, are a grandiose work in progress.

Now – if you really want to dispute the ‘maturity’ issue further, you can. Because a normative ethical code, may be subject to slight changes as other ethical situations arise.

A normative ethical code, serves the purpose of aligning a society to similar thinking with regards to a social normality. This is why the broad basis of the constitution continues to require amendment.

Civil, political, and business ethics, may require a bit more ‘maturity’. (smile).

I can finally say, I agree with your ‘current’ position. We can not teach maturity, not as long as there is not single code of ethics on which to base a definition.

Di:

I appreciate your genuine attempts at understanding where I am 'coming from' or 'headed'...

I fear there is still not an understanding though. You are still not shedding what I believe are the inappropriate understandings. It's common definition has been determined by equating it to another's sense of 'ought'... and you have only done this very same thing... In a more conclusive way, none-the-less, you have not gotten beyond that notion.

I only mentioned 'normative ethics' in response to an extrapolation concerning learned ethics and morals... Although both play major roles in the development of maturity, they are not the only players, and among other things, need to be held separate from maturity in order to fully grasp the scope of the concept which I propose. By definition, both are a collective sense of 'ought', which undeniably implies right and wrong, or good and bad, or whichever descriptive opposites one chooses to use... subjectively ineffective measures of one's maturity.

Only when one can imagine the concept of maturity without implying an outside collective or individual subjective value, will the scope be broadened...

It may or may not agree and include another's sense of 'ought', but very well could be EXACTLY what that person needs in order to be ready for the next step in THEIR life...

Because of uniquely individual circumstances and factors, it is completely possible to have maturity happening simultaneously on opposite ends of the same spectrum; it is maturity none-the-less, regardless of how another may or may not place their own brand of value on it.

I do not know how much clearer this notion can be presented...

Who am I to suggest that another's maturity is wrong or right? It is just maturity. Maturity that is a result of that person's individual circumstances... The realization that maturity happens internally and independantly of any single variable of exposure, allows acceptance to the notion that it can never be taught. In any given situation, there are factors and variables which affect one's maturity, not only in what one embraces and internalizes but also the depth of the embraced and the extrapolation(s) thereof...

It cannot be taught... it can, however, be fed...

It is an ongoing and dynamic internal value assessment born of need and eating only of that from which it feeds.

Then what are the needs?

A couple times in this post, I believe you mentioned the need for inner peace. Is having inner peace a need?

If one 'questions' does the question NEED to be answered to keep inner peace?

If the qustions are answered, illogically or irrationally, but anwers are determined, bringing inner peace once again - is that maturity?

Being that there are no correct or incorrect answers (right or wrong)then who would ever have a 'mature' enough value system with which to study science or philosophy?

So again, what are the needs of a person and does it matter how the needs are satisfied, for that person to become 'mature'?

Di,

Thank you, once again, for your patience and resilience in this matter of discussion... I want to extend to you the gratuitous feelings which are within me...

I do believe inner peace is the mother and child of all need... the need of all other needs being met. It can be impossible to truly measure though, and again, being an internal measurement which may or may not be in alignment with, none-the-less is affected by another's sense of 'ought'.

The 'basic' human needs are sometimes a source of controversy, however, it matters not which list one prefers to align their own agreements with... those needs.

Hypothetically, should every need be always filled completely, one's maturity would be non-existant. There would be no need for it to happen. Perfection is without fault. Maturity is not.


You ask:

" If one 'questions' does the question NEED to be answered to keep inner peace? If the qustions are answered, illogically or irrationally, but anwers are determined, bringing inner peace once again - is that maturity? "

>>>>>>> Inner peace does not equate to maturity... maturity is however, I believe, the dynamic process in which the self attempts to gain inner peace, irrespective of the self-awareness factor, or whether the goal is actually being met. 'Irrational or illogical' thought processes matter not, as a result of the subjective nature of those terms. If one gains a sense of internal accomplishment, on at least some scale, that indeed would be maturity. Although it could be terribly 'wrong' in another's eyes as a result of the differences regarding the internalizations of that individual's adopted moral and ethical codes.<<<<<<<

You asked:

" Being that there are no correct or incorrect answers (right or wrong)then who would ever have a 'mature' enough value system with which to study science or philosophy? "

>>>>>>> I fail to recognize the significance of this question, however, I will attempt to answer it, none-the-less.

'Right and wrong' are subjective to a personal sense of 'ought' and 'correct and incorrect' are not.

I am aware that Scientology was limited in many senses, according to the authority of the churches at the time establishing what it was 'allowed' to study...

Even today we have the ethical and moral issues surrounding some content of Scientific investigation. I am failing to make a relevant connection to maturity here though...???

Allow me to state that your earlier proposition concerning a single code of ethical standards should indeed be a goal for many reasons. The induction of which should lead to a more 'common good' and bring consistency to acceptances, which would inevitably lead to less conflict within society and perhaps a greater understanding of many things. My only hope would be for the pursuit of the understanding that nothing is separate and an increased collective empathy... For the greater good of all. <<<<<<<

So again, what are the needs of a person and does it matter how the needs are satisfied, for that person to become 'mature'?

>>>>>>> This first part has already been answered above, I believe, and the definition of 'mature' needs to be clarified in order to establish the understanding necessary for an answer to the latter...<<<<<<<

Creative, it is your patience and continued efforts to expain that are appreciated. I'm just the 'trying' student, the child asking "are we there yet?".


My point was this. In our attempts to fulfill our needs, if we fail to recognize irrational answers, but rather, accept what seems easiest or most comfortable, how can we have the discipline and the ability to be flexible in the field of science and philosophy.

At any rate, whether it's curiosity, or a true desire to benefit mankind, there is a level a 'maturity' that must be met for objective scientific study. This is not subjective, this would seem to be a required standard. Yet it does not seem to fill the 'needs' catagory that you are referring to.

So, does that mean what I refer to, in this case, as maturity is not the same kind of maturity you had in mind?

I AM GOING LEAVE THE ABOVE STAND as the beginning of a rather lenghty discussion I was having with myself. I wrote for almost half an hour, talking to myself. After half an hour, what I ended up with was "what do I want?". This question haunts me, at times when I'm not sure which step to make. When I'm not sure which path will lead closer to accomplishing the goals in my life.

Those goals are my needs. I don't say that lightly, they are the driving force in my life. Meeting those goals is how I see my life having purpose. "what do I want?" is the learning process to which you are referring. It doesn't matter which path I choose at that moment, what matters (for your scenario) is that I am learning (maturing). The right or wrong of the path, is subjective to me, because I am attempting to meet the goals that will fulfill my needs. There is confrontation and conflict with the 'oughts', of my past. I will override those 'oughts' if I percieve attaining my goals will be furthered.

In that, is your idea that the oughts are the moral perception of right and wrong, but if the goals are worthy, if they fulfill the internal needs, then right and wrong are subjective. Hence the level and understanding of maturity is different from person to person.

For me there is only 'internal peace and comfort' when I feel I am advancing toward my ultimate goals. I never viewed that as maturity, but if I use that word to describe "what do I want" to accomplish before I die, then I am, in fact, continueing to mature. And I do so, on occasion, regardless of any moral value of right or wrong, because for me, my goals are the ultimate rightness of my being here at all.

For this reason, I believe I will continue to mature until I die and hope, at that time, I somehow accomplished final maturity.

If this is how people mature, I would find it interesting to hear what others believe are their internal needs that require fulfilling.

If I am yet, incorrectly understanding your thoery, I will simply sit back and hope that others will comment and maybe I will 'achieve' some knowledge. After all, It can only put me closer to achieving my goals.

Di:



The discipline of science... Ahhh... Di, I shall take the stance of no stance... for it is better that I not speak of that which I have no knowledge of... Convention and the conformity thereof are always being tested are they not? Often times ground-breaking results are inevitably contradicting some previous convention(s)... evolution...

And as far as Philosophy goes... I have probably broken many rules already in this thread alone... One that comes to mind are the notions of subjective and objective... Although I have indeed attempted to steer away from them, I have not succeeded completely...

Both Science and Philosophy hold a different 'weight' than personal maturity, with completely different and impersonal 'needs'...

As far as the rest of your post goes...

Maturity in one follows the path which is paved for it, using the tools it has been given. It cannot use tools which it has not. That being said, it seems you have indeed understood maturity in the context which I present... However, your example in discussion seems to have limited it's potential to a need for a sense of purpose. I sense a frustration of sorts... I hope that I am wrong, dear...

In your explanations, you seem to have separated a specific group of 'needs' all of which fulfill a sense of purpose, which is fine... they are your conscious needs and are as valid as any other. I would suggest that you do whatever it is that truly leaves you fulfilled. Only you will know. It is within you. It is indeed within us all, beneath this world's fingerprint... within us all. Nothing is separate.

This is quite interesting Di.....I think every human being on earth needs goals......needs something or you would just merely exsist and honestly what good is that. But for some reason I feel that your thinking to much about it. Why are you dealing with your goals on a scientific or anything else level. Maybe that just because I am a religious person and I know that everything that is meant for my life will be. This however, does not mean that I sit back and just let it happen.....on the contrary.....I know without a shadow of a doubt that I was placed on this planet to make a difference and I have known this since a very young age. So I just do.....I don't think about it.....I just do it. When I saw the plight of the women in Africa and them getting their genitals cut and what the society did to these women...I could not stand by and let it happen and I got involved on a political level and went there and talked to the women and explained to them that it didn't have to be that way....they have a voice use it. I have also done this in Egypt and many other places....and this is in no way tooting my own horn....It's to show you that if you want something or you have a goal....Stop thinking about fulfilling it and just do it.

I also know this can be a scary thing......but I also know that when you do it the first time....the empowerment it gives you....the knowing that you made a difference for me was everything.

I know if I died tomorrow that I lived truly lived my life. And I made a difference in someones life.....And isn't that what it's all about.......Do something don't merely exsist.